SUNDAY AM: Knowing it was going to be a boring box office, I took off Saturday. First, I have zero interest in country music. Sony/Screen Gems’ Country Strong, which expanded into 1,424 theaters and made $7.3M in wider release, hitting the “high end” of the studio’s expectations, with a “B” CinemaScore. The only other tidbit of interest is that a Relativity genre movie finally had an opening that didn’t suck in even if audiences gave it only a “C+” CinemaScore and its budget was a too-big $40 million. This nonsense about medieval knights and witches, again something in which I have zero interest, did around $10.7 million for the weekend. Because all the bigwigs were at the Palm Springs Film Festival for The Fighter, the Relativity spin machine was keeping its other movie’s news under wraps — probably more used to handling losers at the box office.

Meanwhile Oscar-touted movies keep racking up bigger cumes. So how does Sony Pictures continue to remind awards voters about The Social Networkwhen it was released way back in September? If you’re Jeff Blake, you decide to re-release the Facebook origins story in about 600 nationwide theaters this weekend to take advantage of all the critical acclaim and awards hype. And then launch the DVD on January 11th with more than 8 hours of bonus extras. But you also fete the fact that The Social Network will pass $200 million at the worldwide box office within the week. The Social Network has grossed more than $94 million in the U.S. after adding another $650K to its cume.

This supernatural pic made with Atlas Entertainment had a too-big production budget of $40M although Relativity claims pre-sales and tax credits are estimated to cover “a minimum of 75% of that”. This one should earn out because box office combined with the foreign output deals and Relativity’s Netflix arrangement make this the first decent opening for the company in a long time. Somehow, Nicolas Cage (The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, National Treasure, Ghost Rider) and Ron Perlman (Hellboy, Hellboy II) got roped into this. As I said, audiences gave it only a “C+” CinemaScore, and exit polls showed its moviegoers were 52%/48% male vs female, 39%/61% under vs over age 25, and 31%/69% Caucasian vs non-Caucasian (including 36% Hispanic, 14% Asian, 10% African-American, and 9% Other).

The big news here is that the Disney action pic’s international is up to $143.2M (including $17.6M this weekend), as Tron: Legacy 3D opened strong in Italy this past week and is now in release in 43 territories representing 75% of the international market. It will soon expand to China, Belgium, Holland, Germany, and France. New global cume is $291.1M which helps with that $170M budget and $120 worldwide marketing cost.

Sony today said this “hit the high end of our expectations” as the Gwyneth Paltrow pic featuring lotsa country music stars expanded from its 2-theater platforming in Nashville and Los Angeles. Opening weekend exits had a core audience of women who made up 73% of ticket sales and 49% of those were under 30. The film earned a “B+” CinemaScore among women and a “B” overall.

This Disney juggernaut added another $26.3M from overseas and opened at #1 in all 10 of this weekend’s debut territories, including Australia, Brazil, Greece, New Zealand, Argentina, and Columbia. The film is currently in release in 43 territories representing approximately 55% of the international market. It will soon expand to the UK, Scandinavia, Spain, Korea, and Japan as its international cume climbs to $179.3M for a global cume now of $355.2M.

90 Comments

Serial Bomber • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Another bomb for Relativity, how many misses before Wallstreet turns off the tap?

Been There Before • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

No surprise. Roven and Gartner the producers are 2 of the biggest dinosaurs in the business. This is probably the worst reviewed wide release film produced at a decent budget level in years. What is it, 2% on Rotten Tomatoes? So Ryan and Peter Adee just get handed some garbage to try to market and I bet Roven is all over them this morning because it can’t be Roven’s fault. What a mess but trust me I have seen this before and will see it again. This business is going down because of bad projects like this with bad producers who overspend and just collect fees and then everyone loses.

Alex • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Good thing they’re producing The Fighter since it’s a slow but steady profitable hit.

michael • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

What a promising way to start the year…good, solid, reasonably budgeted, adult-targeted movies like TRUE GRIT, BLACK SWAN, THE FIGHTER and THE KING’S SPEECH will be highly profitable, while costly mediocrities like LITTLE FOCKERS and TRON: LEGACY (sorry, fans, there’s no way that’s making it to $200 million now) are disappointments. Here’s hoping Hollywood gets the message…

Bob Nichols • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Oh, so the bar for TRON is now $200 million? Whatever happened to the “it’s never going to get to $150 million club”?

The movie has held up real well in spite of the haters. Only an idiot would expect it to gross that level when the first movie died at the box office in 1982.

Seriously, it’ll end up doing $175 mil domestic, plus foreign there’s no way TRON is a flop amongst any real sane level of projection.

michael • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Only an idiot makes a sequel to a first movie that died at the box office.

Alex • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I think they got the message over the Summer when stuff that was “wait until Redbox” mediocrity at best either flopped or disappointed.

Face it Hollywood, star power and brand name //=// quality per se.

Liz • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

But isn’t it standard for family fare to drop precipitately right after the holidays? The inflated demand for kid-friendly flicks ends when the kids go back to school. So is adult stuff really taking off, or does it just seem that way because the kids’ stuff has plummeted?

worldwide gross • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

no message to be given as it’s worldwide gross that counts,certainly in the case of disney who will get everything apart from india which i think they presold it to.

J • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

How weird… this post actually makes me feel hopeful. Thanks, Michael!

RickJM • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

So a sci-fi movie which by nature has limited audience is going to make around 170 million domestic and that’s a dissappointment? Fockers is up to 120 million domestic and will likely make around 150 million domestic and that’s a dissapointment?

Anonymous • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

“a sci-fi movie which by nature has limited audience…”

Are you serious? A sci-fi movie like, say, AVATAR or THE MATRIX, two films Disney no doubt had in mind when it greenlighted T:L?

And $150 million for LITTLE FOCKERS will be just over half what the previous film grossed six years ago, so yes, that’s a disappointment.

Johann • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

The production work on Tron started long before Avatar was released. And the concept behind Tron is wastly different from Avatar, which makes it too esoteric for casual moviegoers.

Damien • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I think you forget that box office make up a small percentage of the total revenues for event-driven movies, particularly those marketed by Disney. This movie is not the blockbuster Disney hoped it would be, but yes, it will make back all of its money, and it will turn a small profit.

@Risk • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Looks like Relativity’s magic box malfunctioned when it spit out Season of the Witch…

Bellock • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Har, har, har, Sean. It looks like True Grit will outgross your piece of shi*t, so you can stop posting everywhere how Tron will have legs. It is done and Disney will write off $272 million just for Tron alone. Oh, and you can stop telling any reporter who will listen how it was Dick Cook’s daughter’s idea to make the movie. That is getting old.

tron still lives • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

um world wide and dvd sales………..

Oh please • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Bellock,

What nonsense. Did Disney even spend $272 million on Tron all together, even with P&A? What a doofus.

It’ll do $150 million in the US and has already done $100 million+ abroad (will probably be close to $130 by the end of the weekend) and it’s opened in only 2/3rds of foriegn markets.

In the end it’ll do $350 million to $400 million global. Not enough to break even but when you take into account TV/Cable rights and DVD sales/rentals it should be fine.

j • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

you do realise it was the biggest gross of dec? also it has done very well worldwide-not to mention dvd/home video etc on its way

jj • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

It’s amazing how Americans have the choice to go see superior films like Black Swan or The Fighter and they go see crap like Little Fockers. Dumb assholes.

idiot • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

See a campy horror film about ballet, a movie about a vulgar family with a crackhead or a silly comedy sequel to two successful predecessors. Gee I wonder where families are going.

cookmeyer1970 • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

” a vulgar family with a crackhead…” c’mon, the fighter was a great movie and so much more that that. I actually know several people who have had addicts in their families right here in America. Can you believe that? Some of them even live in the midwest and go to church every sunday! That depiction of a dysfunctional family who still loves each other was pretty spot on. The film’s box office is also affected by its genre, production budget, and marketing. It’ll profit and that’s really all that matters.

And really, are you suggesting Little Fockers is good, wholesome, family fun? It’s not by a long shot.

Alex • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

He said “Americans,” not “families.” Reading comprehension, a$$hole.

Boy,your user ID is so on the money.

dumb • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Are you nuts? “Families” aren’t going to see “Little Fockers” dumbass – it’s “Rated PG-13 for mature sexual humor throughout, language and some drug content.” Clueless couples and singles are going to see it, and they are reporting back horrendous reviews in droves.

The poster above you wrote “Americans”, not “families”.

Doc Michaels • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Just like how the British have the choice to see all kinds of movies and instead went to see GULLIVER’S TRAVELS last weekend, enabling it to gross over $10 million and outperform its opening weekend in the U.S.

Ignorant European asshole.

precisely • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

“all kinds of movies” =/= “The Fighter” & “Black Swan”

Also, there is nothing in jj’s post to indicate that he is European ( which incidentally =/= British but nice try approximating the two!) and not in, fact, an American himself.

Ignorant asshole.

Bill H • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Yeah that’s always funny to me, Europeans pretend to have some sort of superior attitude when it comes to “cinema”, yet check the box office lists in France or any European country every weekend and it’s always the big stupid Hollywood blockbuster at #1, just like in the US. Also, Meet The Fockers is a bomb, it’s not doing well at all in the US.

Jacob • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Ha ha. I thought the exact thing. Just goes to show how pointless it is pointing out the “ignorance” of others when it’s everywhere you look.

Foamy • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Protip – British spell it “arsehole”. JJ probably isn’t British.

Paula • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I wouldn’t blame the Europeans actually – they haven’t much of a clue who Jack Black is, or know that he’s currently not acting. All they see is a modern day retelling of a story everyone’s familiar with, woven with CGI effects.

Temeka • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

and wasn’t Mamma Mia their highest grossing film ever over there? Yeah to quote Kevin Kline in A Fish Called Wanda “You english are sooo superior aren’t you?!”

jake • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Having seen both black swan and little fockers — i’d much rather see Little fockers and have fun than have a headache with black swan and be disappointed — besides — with the R rated Black swan, do you expect families to all go see Black swan?

Alex • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

WTF are you whining about? Black Swan and Fighter have made profit and found their audience.

When will ignorants like you realize that PSA is more important than theater count?

WGAmember • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

jj –

You are overestimating the choice. My mother lives in the fly-over. She and her friends went out to see a movie last night. Four women, all on social security. Without really planning in advance, they went to their local megaplex (26 screens total – not kidding) thinking they could see Black Swan, The Fighter, King’s Speech or at least something of that quality. None of those were playing there.

Little Fockers? On three screens — starting every half hour.

Guess what they saw? And, dear God, did they regret it. My mother is actually angry at Dustin Hoffman for being in the movie, and one of her friends wants to drum Barbra out of the tribe.

Black Swan is at ONE theater in her fairly-major-city, and it’s on the outskirts of town. Too far out for her and her blue-haired friends to drive. DItto for The King’s Speech.

Here’s the worst part — this is an audience segment with money to burn, who is looking for entertainment. When they left, according to my mother, two of them swore off movie outings permanently.

In the next decade, boomers are going to make up 30% of our population, and if we don’t start creating entertainment for them — that they can GET TO — our business will be in worse trouble than it already is.

flowbee • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Quite frankly, I am amazed that Season of the Witch is opening so high. It shows the power of Nic Cage to open complete crap. Imagine if he stopped starring in crap and went back to acting in good films?

I think that might be a very, very slight possibility depending on how things run through awards season. It’s weekends are not huge but it’s holding well and might expand a little further if awards noms come through.

But I wouldn’t bet very much on it being guaranteed. That said, it seems destined to get into the high 70s/low 80s perhaps which for the type of film it is remains a terrific performance.

And more importantly, means it’s ALSO been a solid money-maker as well since it only cost $13 million to produce and should end up clearing $100 million worldwide total once it starts to open in international markets in the coming weeks.

SMP Belltown • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I think $100 million domestic for Black Swan would be highly unlikely. But if there isn’t a real huge flood of wide release indies before Oscar night, Black Swan will certainly have a few more weeks to generate $20+ million more.

Maybe… by March 1 its totals will exceed those for Yogi Bear 3D? I think the symbolism of a victory like that would be quite notable.

Black Swan EP • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I hope you are right Bob(100MM domestic), I’ve got a vested interest, lol. I know we’ll be well into profit on Domestic alone & everything else is pure gravy!!! 140MM Worldwide box office, minimum!

jc • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Not unless it wins Best Picture. But hell of a gross and reminder to Hollywood for Darren Aronofsky. Almost makes me want to try out “The Fountain” again, which I found a complete (but stylish) bore.

Zach • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

hahah. No, you were right the first time. The Fountain was a complete (but sytlish) bore.

laura • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

and it hasn’t even opened abroad yet!!! This is triumph!!!
IDK about 100mil, but it’s definetely 80+ mil!

micky • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I think it will. it’s done all this in fewer than 1500 theatres which is impressive: and it dropped by a scant 6% this weekend, adding only 31 theatres. that bodes extremely well. if it finds itself with a half-doezen oscar noms, i don’t think 120 is out of the question, actually.

oh lord • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Just how much money does Cage still owe the IRS? Dear lord, can’t he stop starring in movies like this any more? How much longer must this go on?

breck • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I ask that about Jennifer Aniston all the time, except she doesn’t have a good excuse like the IRS.

It’s an amazing that year in which people can actually see Oscar movies. They don’t show them in 10 theaters. When people watch every awards, read countless praise about those movies and then can’t see them because they are not showing it anywhere.

And there you are – awards movies actually make money. True Grit – $100 millions and counting. Black Swan – $50, Fighter 50$, King’s Speech $30 (to which I’n surprised since it’s not like it’s movie for mainstream audience when you see trailer. And if not all that Word of Mouth around it I would probably pass it by). Social Network almost $100 million, Town – $90 millions.

And not talking about Toy Story 3 and Inception since those are blockbusters.

That is a good year for Awards movies.

bobby the saint • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Pleased as punch that “Black Swan,” despite being in considerably fewer theaters is beating “The Fighter” — 2010’s most overrated movie of the year.

Hallelujah.

Esquire • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Great to see The King’s Speech continue to work well.

leo • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

For a movie that looks like it was made for the SyFy Channel, Season of the Witch didn’t do too badly.

Nikki — let me start off the year by saying thank you for always providing the earliest box office results anywhere — it is so well appreciated. THANK YOU!

How much does Narnia need to make for them to make another sequel? Also, did anyone see the dawn treader — is it better than caspian — I am not that interested to see it after I saw Caspian.

sam • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

If you can’t seem to fall asleep — go catch a showing of True Grit. If you want to feel like you are an acid trip — go see Black Swan.

Franky • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

I hope the studios are taking note of those results. Make decently budgeted ($10 to $50 mill. max.) films, that are based on good ideas, with great talent in front and behind the camera.

Low risk. Great quality. Great rewards. Great artistic pride for the people involved.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

Craig • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Season of the Witch, another slam dunk from The flop factory. Who is the genius that greenlit this masterpiece? Its gross won’t cover the cost of their reshoots.

As for our America bashing friend, Doc Michaels nailed it. If overseas tastes are so enlightened, how come they are flocking to see the steaming pile of Gullivers that US audiences categorically rejected, having already pushed it out of the top 10. Sure Crap like Fockers plays well, but True Grit, Black Swan, The Fighter and The kings Speech are playing great.

steve • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

it was my pick too. matter of fact, it was everyone’s and their mama’s pick.

Rooster Beak • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

SO glad True Grit outperformed Little Fockers this weekend.

It’s about time quality beat shame.

Anonymous • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

The Fighter should be grossing more than this. It’s the best film in the Top 10. It’s not a Rocky rip off people, go see it!

Elijah • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

BLACK SWAN will gross $100 million in the US alone, and that is ASTOUNDING for such a niche picture.

Steve • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

True Grit’s getting great word of mouth.

What about next week?

1. The Dilemma
2. True Grit
3. Green Hornet

If Seth finishes third it will make my weekend.

WaitingForTheShoetoDrop • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

How about for its next project Relativity and Ryan Kavanaugh produce a remake of “The Black Hole?” Oh, that’s right. That’s what they have been doing all along for Paul Singer and Elliott Associates.

jbinminot • on Jan 9, 2011 8:01 am

Some Americans don’t get movies like Black Swan and the King’s Speech at their local multiplexes. Get your facts straight before attacking an entire nation. Bigot!